Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-11-17-Speech-1-132"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-11-17"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Excise duties on petrol and commercial diesel fuel2
dcterms:Language	"fi"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20031117.9.1-132"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-11-17-Speech-1-1332
lpv:speaker	lp:Eija-Riitta Korhola2
lpv:spokenAs	member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Suomen kristillisdemokraatit rp (2001-05-30--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Latvia Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-04-30)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, Europe must take measures relating to car use if we wish to comply with our Kyoto obligations. It would be shortsighted to try to attain the Kyoto targets at the expense of those who create employment, if no previous attempt had been made to exploit all the opportunities which transport affords for reducing emissions. The EU has already concluded agreements, for example with European car manufacturers, concerning production of cars which are cleaner and perform better in terms of fuel economy. The directive now before us is important for efforts to achieve the same end from the demand side by making costs visible to consumers. It is just a pity that the Commission proposal comes on its own. For it to be adopted, it ought to be discussed in a broad context: within a decade it is proposed to establish a European tax system comprising charges for vehicle registration and use, an intelligent pricing system for infrastructure, and harmonised fuel taxes. As it is not possible to adopt such a comprehensive approach now, and as this directive fixes the level of fuel taxes for quite a long time, a decision seems unlikely. A comprehensive review would be in the interests of consumers and would ensure balanced development of transport in sparsely populated regions where no public transport is available. In rural and remote regions, people are more dependent on private cars, and the external costs of transport are lower than elsewhere. People have a tendency to reconsider their choices only when a major change occurs, such as when moving house, transferring to a new place of employment or buying a new car; they may not even realise substantial developments in public services have been made. Accordingly, big changes in immediately perceptible costs, such as fuel prices or road pricing, are important initiators of choice processes. In that sense, a linear model for increasing excise on fuel may be too slow and gradual to spur consumers genuinely to perceive the situation in such a way as to change their consumption patterns. At all events, it is important from the outset to stress in public information the ultimate objective of internalising the external costs of transport. Diesel vehicles consume less fuel and produce fewer carbon dioxide emissions. It must, however, be remembered that they emit more nitrogen oxides and particulates, which are a serious threat to public health. It may be considered a justified objective, therefore, to align the rates of excise duty on diesel and petrol."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph